Chapter One

A brief account of events from Nehemiah to the accession of Antiochus Epiphanes (1 Macc 1:1-10). The apostasy of certain sons of Israel in deference to Hellenistic customs (1 Macc 1:11-15). The successful war of Antiochus Epiphanes against Egypt (1 Macc 1:16-19). The plundering of Jerusalem and the Temple by Antiochus, and the grief of the Jews on this account (1 Macc 1:20-28). The renewed destruction of Jerusalem and its conversion into a pagan fortress (1 Macc 1:29-40). Antiochus’s edict to his entire kingdom demanding that all profess one (Hellenic) faith and follow one set of (Hellenic) customs (1 Macc 1:41-51). Severe measures to enforce the edict, persecution and torment of the Israelites (1 Macc 1:52-61). The steadfastness and unwavering resolve of many of them (1 Macc 1:62-64).

1 Maccabees 1:1. After Alexander, son of Philip, the Macedonian, who came out of the land of Kittim, had struck down Darius, king of the Persians and Indians, and reigned in his place, having first reigned over Greece — The first nine verses of the book constitute a kind of “introduction” to the history of Antiochus Epiphanes and at the same time an attempt to connect the events of the preceding biblical book (Nehemiah) with subsequent events covering the entire period of the gap in the biblical narrative, from 440 to 175 BC. As such an attempt, this section is not entirely satisfying for the reader: first, it is very brief and too summary; second, it also suffers from historical inaccuracy, mentioning some kind of division by Alexander of his state among his friends, which he did not actually carry out. The narrative begins with the words — καί έγένετο — “and it came to pass” — the customary opening formula in Hebrew historical narratives. — “Alexander, son of Philip, the Macedonian...” Alexander the Great of Macedon, born 356, died 323 BC, founder of the Macedonian monarchy, whose power Daniel had prophesied (Dan 8:21), foretelling also the breakup of his kingdom into four parts “not with his power” and “not to his descendants.” “From the land of Kittim...” — cf. Jer 2:10 and Ezek 27:6 — “the islands of Kittim” — a designation for a region comprising a group of islands and a coastal strip in the western part of the Mediterranean, and specifically the Aegean, Sea (the present-day Archipelago); Macedonia is also included in this region, otherwise called Κιτιεις (1 Macc 8:5; cf. γή Κιτιαίων, Isa 23:1; Num 24:24 and Κίτιοι, Dan 11:30). — Darius — Δαρείος — the last king of the Persian Empire, Darius III, Codomannus, who reigned 336–331 BC. — King of the Persians and Indians (1 Macc 14:2) — the title of the Persian king from the time of the unification of Media and Persia into one monarchy under Cyrus (cf. Esth 1:14-19; Dan 5:28). — “Having first reigned over Greece...” — this expression must be understood not in the sense that Darius also ruled over Greece and that Alexander reigned there in his place, but rather that Alexander first reigned over Greece before reigning over the other dominions of Darius. The last words of this phrase — τ. ρότερον έπί τήν Ελλάδα — refer only to Alexander’s own earlier history, independent of any reference to Darius, in whose dominions Alexander afterward reigned. His prior reign over Greece was thus prior to his reign in Darius’s own lands and in Darius’s place. This is what the author wishes to say. As an interjection, as a digression of thought to events prior to those being described, the phrase “first over Greece” should properly be placed in parentheses. Alexander was actually proclaimed “king of Greece” considerably later; at first he conducted his wars against the Persians only as the freely elected supreme commander of the united Greek forces. The remark (1 Macc 6:2) that he was “the first (king) to reign over the Greeks” is not entirely accurate, since his father Philip had already governed the Greeks on equal terms; therefore it must be supposed that Alexander appeared to Jewish recognition as “the first (king) to reign over the Greeks” in the sense that he broke the power of the Persians and displaced their significance in the East, as the founder of a new world-wide Hellenic monarchy whose glory completely eclipsed that of his father. The right to call Alexander the first king of Greece was also given to the Jew by the well-known prophecy of Daniel (Dan 8:21) concerning the new world events then unfolding.

1 Maccabees 1:2. He waged many wars, captured many fortified places, and put to death the kings of the earth. “He put to death the kings of the earth...” — this was not their “killing” in battle, but the ancient custom of barbarians, including the Greeks, of putting captives to death after taking them prisoner — sometimes in an extremely cruel and inhuman manner (Jer 39:6-7). By “kings of the earth” (Greek Βασιλείς, without the article) are meant here the kings and princes subject to the Persian great king, and the governors and rulers of the various provinces of the great monarchy who bore royal titles.

1 Maccabees 1:3. He advanced to the ends of the earth and took plunder from many nations; and the earth was silenced before him, and he became great, and his heart was lifted up. “He advanced to the ends of the earth...” — a hyperbolic expression that has some justification in the conqueror’s extraordinary successes. — “The earth was silenced before him...” — the meaning of this expression may be the same as in Ps 75:9 — “the earth feared and was still” (cf. 1 Macc 11:38), or it may also denote actual calm and a peaceful disposition of the land, as in 1 Macc 7:50; cf. Judg 3:11.

1 Maccabees 1:4. He gathered a very strong army and ruled over provinces, nations, and rulers, and they became his tributaries. “They became his tributaries...” — Greek έγένοντο είς φόρον, cf. Judg 1:30.

1 Maccabees 1:5–6. After this he took to his bed and, feeling that he was dying, summoned the noble men among his servants who had been brought up with him from youth, and divided his kingdom among them while he was still alive. The account that Alexander “while still alive” divided his kingdom among his companions finds no confirmation in other historians of Alexander. The most reliable and detailed of them (Arrian, VII, 26 and Curtius X, 5) report on the last moments of his life that those surrounding his deathbed did indeed put to him the question: “To whom does he entrust his kingdom?” But to this question Alexander replied with only one word: “To the most worthy!” (τώκρατίστω). At the same time he handed his royal signet ring to his chief bodyguard, Perdiccas, as a sign of his appointment as regent of the kingdom, which was then divided up by Alexander’s chief commanders and companions themselves.

1 Maccabees 1:7. Alexander reigned twelve years and then died. “Alexander reigned twelve years...” According to Arrian, XII, 28 — twelve years and 8 months. On the night before June 1 a severe fever overtook him, and by the evening of the 11th he was gone...

1 Maccabees 1:8. And his servants ruled, each in his own place. “His servants ruled, each in his own place...” — that is, in the portion that fell to each, having proclaimed themselves kings.

1 Maccabees 1:9. After his death they all put on crowns, and after them their sons for many years; and they multiplied evil on the earth. “They all put on crowns...” By “all” one should properly understand the “noble men” from among Alexander’s servants mentioned in 1 Macc 1:6, such as Antigonus, who received Asia; Ptolemy — Egypt; Seleucus — Babylon; Lysimachus — Thrace; Cassander — Macedonia. — “And after them their sons for many years...” — that is, they reigned, putting on crowns. — “And they multiplied evil on the earth...” — that is, they caused much suffering and grief through their internecine wars and injustices of every kind. From this point the author makes a natural transition to the description of the cruelties of Antiochus Epiphanes that fell upon Judea.

1 Maccabees 1:10. And there came out from them a sinful root — Antiochus Epiphanes, son of king Antiochus, who had been a hostage in Rome, and he began to reign in the one hundred and thirty-seventh year of the kingdom of the Greeks. “And there came out from them a sinful root...” The meaning of the expression “sinful root” (ρίζα αμαρτωλός) is clarified by comparison with similar expressions in Isaiah (Isa 11:1) — “the root of Jesse,” a shoot, scion, branch from it, and also in Sirach (Sir 47:25) — “the root of David.” In all these cases “root” is used in the sense of “offshoot,” “shoot” from something, but not in the sense of “beginning” or “source.” “Sinful root” in the present case means “offshoot of sin,” as of an evil principle in the world, the embodiment of that principle in Antiochus and his godless life. This “root” “came out from them,” i.e., from Alexander’s successors, who in their totality provided a convenient environment or soil for this. More specifically, one may understand here the dynasty of the Seleucid kings, among whom Antiochus was the 8th, and the 4th bearing the name Antiochus⁴. His epithet Epiphanes — Επιφανής — means “brilliant,” “glorious,” “illustrious.” — “Son of king Antiochus...” — i.e., Antiochus III, or the Great, who reigned 223–187 BC and left behind two sons — Seleucus IV Philopator (187–175 BC) and Antiochus Epiphanes (175–163 BC). — “Who had been a hostage in Rome...” — this refers to the Antiochus Epiphanes mentioned earlier, not to his father, also named Antiochus, although his name stands closer to the relative pronoun “who.” This took place after the battle of Magnesia, in 189 BC. — “In the one hundred and thirty-seventh year of the kingdom of the Greeks...” — i.e., of the Seleucid era, the beginning of which coincides with the 117th year of the Olympiad era, the first year from the founding of Rome’s 442nd year, and with 312 BC. For a more precise calculation and comparison of dates across all these eras, one must take into account, first, the different starting points or times of year from which each era’s count begins. Thus the year of the founding of the Seleucid monarchy — reckoned from autumn to autumn — falls in the first Olympiad of year 117, which counts from summer to summer, 312–311 BC, while this last (year of the Christian era) begins, as is well known, from winter to winter. Second, no little confusion in this matter is caused by the circumstance that the author of the Maccabean book always follows the odd practice of counting years by the Seleucid era, while counting months by the Jewish custom from Nisan to Nisan (i.e., from April to April, or from spring to spring), as is evident, for example, from 1 Macc 4:52 and other places, and sometimes also by the Roman custom from January to January. Taking these considerations into account, one can establish more precisely that the year of Antiochus Epiphanes’ accession — the 137th by the Seleucid era — corresponds to 175 BC, more precisely running from autumn 176 to autumn 175 BC. — The circumstances of Antiochus Epiphanes’ accession deserve to be noted, and it is also not superfluous for greater clarity and completeness to give at least a brief sketch of the events preceding the history of Antiochus. Seleucus Nicator, the founder of the Seleucid dynasty — one of the most remarkable generals of the great Alexander — was, among other things, the founder of a particular Syro-Macedonian kingdom, into which Babylon entered in 312, as well as many lands along the shores of the Mediterranean. Having thus united the greater part of Alexander’s monarchy, Seleucus inaugurates the powerful Seleucid era, with whose fortunes the fate of Jewry was long connected, including throughout the entire Maccabean period. The era of Seleucid rule over Syria and Palestine gave one of the most active and fruitful epochs of Jewish history, when the struggle against the fascination with Hellenic customs, ignited in the best portion of the Jewish people, not only brilliantly withstood a multitude of disasters that swept in, but also managed for a time to revive the happy days of the best kings of Judah. The early Seleucids were not only no great burden to the Jews but also distinguished themselves by many kindnesses toward them. Thus Seleucus Nicator granted civic rights to many Jews in the cities he founded in Asia and lower Syria, and even in his capital Antioch. These rights were maintained for the Jews by Seleucus’s nearest successors — Antiochus I Soter (282–262) and especially Antiochus II Theos (262–246). Under Seleucus Callinicus, the successor of Antiochus II (246–226), Judea began to endure many disasters, becoming the arena of the Seleucids’ struggle with the Ptolemies (kings of Egypt), compelled to please both sides and to pay equally in the victories of one and the defeats of the other. These disasters of Judea reached particular intensity with the rise of Antiochus III the Great (after Seleucus III Ceraunus, 226–223 BC), who was drawn into war not only with Egypt but with Rome (223–187 BC). The battle with the Romans (at Magnesia, in 189 BC), which was very unfavorable for Antiochus, forced him into a shameful peace with Rome, one of the conditions of which was, among other things, the holding of Antiochus Epiphanes as a hostage. For Antiochus Epiphanes himself this had the beneficial side that it helped him receive a proper, though in the Roman spirit, upbringing suited to his future destiny, and to establish connections with the young nobility of the powerfully flourishing world city. When Antiochus III died and Seleucus IV Philopator, Antiochus Epiphanes’ elder brother, ascended the throne, Antiochus Epiphanes was immediately summoned to the Syrian court. But even before Antiochus reached Syria, he was met with news of his brother’s death at the hands of Heliodorus, who, however, failed to establish himself on the murdered man’s throne and perished himself at the hands of Antiochus’s partisans. Having unhindered inherited his brother’s throne, Antiochus was not slow to apply in his situation all that Rome had taught him. Clearly understanding that the decline and weakness of the Seleucid monarchy had from the very beginning been conditioned by the absence of genuine national unity, Antiochus did not shrink from embarking, in order to achieve and consolidate this unity, on the new path of intensified “Hellenization” of his domains — i.e., the introduction everywhere of uniform customs, one language, one faith and one culture in the then-prevailing pagan spirit — a path that, among other things, brought him into a fateful conflict with the Jews and created for him such a sad notoriety in history. About all these events the First Book of Maccabees begins to narrate in greater detail from verse 11 onward.

1 Maccabees 1:11. In those days there came out of Israel lawless men who persuaded many, saying: Let us go and make a covenant with the nations around us, for since we separated ourselves from them, many troubles have overtaken us. 1 Macc 1:11-15: The successes of Antiochus Epiphanes in carrying out his plans against the Jewish people, and even the very emergence of these plans, were greatly aided by a party of apostates from the Lord that suddenly appeared within the people itself, who had come to love pagan customs and institutions. Regarding the time (and circumstances) of the formation of this party within a people who had hitherto been distinguished by faithfulness to the Lord, the author expresses himself indefinitely — “in those days” — έν ταίς ᾿ημέραις έκείναις, i.e., in the days of Antiochus. From the comparison of this passage with 2 Macc 4:7 and following, 2 Macc 4:23 and following, and with the date of verse 20 of this chapter (1 Macc 1:20), it can be established more precisely that this took place at the very beginning of Antiochus’s reign. These “lawless men,” who came out — i.e., stepped forward — from among Israel, managed first to lead astray “some,” and then “many of the people” (1 Macc 1:13; 2 Macc 4:13 and following) by their example and words. The call: “Let us go and make a covenant with the nations around us” represents a deliberate, intentional violation of the commandment of the law: “(do not mingle and) do not make a covenant with them or with their gods,” i.e., with the pagans, with foreign peoples (Exod 23:32). — The word “covenant” is used here in a broader sense. This was not a political agreement for the purpose of mutual defense against a threatening external danger, but far more a union with them in customs and way of life, up to and including the betrayal of religious convictions. Characteristic is the motivation for the apostasy of these Jews: “for since we separated ourselves from them (the surrounding nations), many troubles have overtaken us,” they say. First of all, already incorrect here is that the separation of the Jews from the pagans is treated as if it were a recent phenomenon, whereas it had been established from the very beginning of Israel’s consecration as the people of God, and as a natural consequence of that consecration; on the other hand, it also contradicts the truth to claim that this separation supposedly brought about “many troubles.” The entire history of the Jews, on the contrary, clearly shows the very close connection between the people’s welfare and their piety and faithfulness to the law of Moses: when that piety flourished, the Israelite people also prospered; but as soon as they were drawn into friendship with and imitation of pagan customs, they immediately began to bear divine punishment at the hands of those very pagans.

1 Maccabees 1:12–13. And this proposal seemed good in their eyes. Some of the people expressed willingness and went to the king; and he gave them authority to observe the ordinances of the nations. “Authority to observe the ordinances of the nations...” was needed, confirmed and protected by the king’s authority, since those who remained faithful among the people could have applied to the apostates the death penalty by stoning prescribed by Moses for such an offense.

1 Maccabees 1:14. They built a gymnasium in Jerusalem according to the custom of the nations “They built in Jerusalem a gymnasium according to the custom of the nations...” According to 2 Macc 4:9 — this godless undertaking was contrived by Jason, the brother of Onias. Seeking the high priesthood, he promised the king a large monetary bribe, and also pledged to underwrite the gymnasium itself, whose opening he sought by royal authority, with a large monetary contribution. All this was possible only for a candidate for the high priesthood who in any case was backed by a large party of which he was the head and spokesman; it is plausible that he himself had great influence over this party and easily expected to find its full sympathy and support for an enterprise so godless from the standpoint of faithful Jews. — “A gymnasium according to the custom of the nations” — γυμνάσιον, a gymnasium, i.e., an exercise ground for athletic exercises, contests, and games of young men, adorned with colonnades and with seating for spectators. By establishing such a school they hoped to strike the surest blow against the Mosaic religion, by raising an entirely new generation of young men in the pagan spirit.

1 Maccabees 1:15. and made themselves uncircumcised, and abandoned the holy covenant, and joined with the nations, and sold themselves to do evil. “Made themselves uncircumcised...” The meaning of the original is somewhat different: “they made themselves foreskins” — partly by a new surgical procedure and partly by other simpler means they concealed the mark of circumcision, so as not to provoke ridicule from the uncircumcised when they appeared unclothed at athletic contests. — “They abandoned the holy covenant...” Circumcision was the sign of this covenant; therefore its removal, and even more the obliteration of its marks on the body, constituted open destruction of the covenant, a complete renunciation of it — apostasy. — “They joined with the nations...” — έζεύχθησαν τ. εθ. — more precisely: “they yoked themselves to the nations” — taking on pagan convictions and customs. — “And sold themselves to do evil...” — i.e., they became willing slaves of sin — an expression that verbatim echoes 1 Kgs 21:20, where Elijah says to Ahab: “you have sold yourself to do evil...” — πέπρασαι ποιήσαι τό πονηρόν... (cf. Rom 7:14 and following). How widely all this found sympathy among the people is evident from 2 Macc 4:13-17.

1 Maccabees 1:16. When Antiochus saw that his kingdom was established, he resolved to become king over Egypt, in order to reign over two kingdoms, 1 Macc 1:16-28: The plundering of the Temple and the bloodshed that Antiochus carried out in Jerusalem is described in greater detail in 2 Macc 5:1-23. This evil deed he committed on his return from his successful campaign against Egypt (1 Macc 1:19). This was his second campaign (2 Macc 5:1) there, which took place (1 Macc 1:20) in the 143rd year of the Seleucid era, i.e., in the autumn of 170 BC. — “When Antiochus saw that his kingdom was established...” This consolidation consisted in the removal of Heliodorus, who had usurped the throne after the murder of Seleucus; then Antiochus received from Rome official recognition as king, even though the legitimate heir to the throne was properly Seleucus’s son Demetrius, who had just been sent as a hostage to Rome in exchange for Antiochus; — and finally, on the basis of a remark by Jerome (ad Dan 11:1), one may think that Antiochus succeeded in winning over to his side a powerful party that had been pulling toward the Egyptian Ptolemy and preventing him from feeling secure and firmly seated on the Syrian throne. — The goal of the war with Egypt was Antiochus’s desire to “become king over Egypt, in order to reign over two kingdoms,” although the pretext for war was chosen in a rather plausible form that gave his power-hungry plans a completely irreproachable appearance. After the death of Cleopatra, Antiochus’s sister, who had been married to the Egyptian king Ptolemy V Epiphanes and had ruled the throne as regent on behalf of her son Ptolemy VI Philometor, the guardians of the young king — Eulaeus and Lenaeus — demanded that Antiochus return Coele-Syria, which had once been ceded by Antiochus III the Great, Cleopatra’s father, to Egypt as a dowry for his daughter. Antiochus Epiphanes now declared this demand not only unjust following Cleopatra’s death, but himself laid claim to Egypt as the queen’s brother.

1 Maccabees 1:17. and he entered Egypt with a strong force, with chariots, elephants, horsemen, and a great fleet; “He entered Egypt with... a great fleet...” — this is not a fully accurate translation of the Greek έν στόλω μεγάλω, which properly means “with great armament.” Although στόλος is used in 2 Macc 12:9 in the sense of a naval armament, i.e., ships, nevertheless in the present case the context does not require with necessity the same interpretation.

1 Maccabees 1:18. and he engaged in battle with Ptolemy, king of Egypt; and Ptolemy was afraid before him and turned to flee, and many fell wounded. “Ptolemy was afraid before him (Antiochus)...” — After Ptolemy Epiphanes, who died in 181 BC, two young sons of Ptolemy remained: Philometor VI and Physcon VII. Which of these Ptolemies is meant in this verse is a matter on which commentators disagree. The majority point to the first, but since he fell into Antiochus’s hands already in the first war, others understand the second, and explain Antiochus’s very campaign by his desire to use Philometor’s rights against Physcon. In general the description of this war shows that the author of our book took little care to distinguish the two brothers — Philometor and Physcon — all the more so because Antiochus intended in fact to conquer Egypt and wished to dethrone both kings. — “Many fell wounded” — according to other texts more precisely translated as “killed” — (Heb. ..., Syr. occisi, cf. Judg 9:40; 1 Sam 17:52).

1 Maccabees 1:19–20. And they captured the fortified cities of the land of Egypt, and he took plunder from the land of Egypt. After subduing Egypt, Antiochus returned in the one hundred and forty-third year and marched against Israel, and entered Jerusalem with a strong force; The occasion for Antiochus’s attack on Jerusalem and his brutal treatment of it was the disorder that had arisen in the city (specifically between Jason and Menelaus), which was reported to the king and interpreted by him as an attempt by Judea to break away from Syria (2 Macc 5:5 and following). However, the occasion itself provided far less justification than the use Antiochus made of it: he needed money for further military enterprises, and this motive drove his barbaric actions in Jerusalem and the Temple — without regard to any pretext.

1 Maccabees 1:21–24. He entered the sanctuary with arrogance and took the golden altar, the lampstand and all its vessels, the table of showbread, the libation vessels, the cups, the golden censers, the curtain, the crowns, and the golden decoration on the front of the Temple — he stripped everything. He took also the silver and the gold and the precious vessels, and he took the hidden treasures that he found. And having taken everything, he went away to his land, and he committed murder and spoke with great arrogance. Having enumerated part by part what Antiochus took, the author repeats everything plundered in summary, while the parallel passage in 2 Macc 5:21 even indicates the value of what was stolen — 1,800 talents. — “He spoke with great arrogance...” — reviling the Lord God and His people with blasphemous words. The expression is obviously borrowed from Daniel (Dan 7:8). — This event is mentioned, apart from Josephus, by the historians Polybius, Strabo, Nicolaus of Damascus, Timagenes, Castor, and Apollodorus.

1 Maccabees 1:25–26. Therefore there was great lamentation throughout Israel, in every place. Rulers and elders groaned, young men and virgins languished, and the beauty of women was altered. “Rulers and elders groaned...” — άρχοντες καί πρεσβύτεροι; άρχοντες — heads of the tribes, πρεσβύτεροι — heads of the families. — “The beauty of women was altered...” — i.e., from grief and sorrow they grew thin and faded.

1 Maccabees 1:27–28. Every bridegroom took up mourning, and the one sitting in the bridal chamber was in sorrow. The earth shook on account of those who lived in it, and the whole house of Jacob was clothed in shame. “The earth shook on account of those who lived in it...” — i.e., for the sake of its inhabitants, as though sharing in their suffering and disgrace. All other translations of the Greek έπί with the accusative — such as: against the inhabitants, under the inhabitants, through the inhabitants, and the like — are less precise and fitting. — “The whole house of Jacob was clothed in shame...” — literally, “every house of Jacob,” “every family,” which collectively gave “the whole house of Jacob.” — “Clothed in shame” — for the disgraceful desecration of its sanctuary and the dishonoring of its religion.

1 Maccabees 1:29. Two years later the king sent a chief collector of tribute to the cities of Judah, and he came to Jerusalem with a large crowd; “Two years later...” — μετά δύο ᾿ετη ᾿ημερων — literally: “after two years of days, or time” — a Hebraism common in the Bible when designating time (Gen.; cf. 2 Sam 13:23; Jer 18:3). Since the first plundering of Jerusalem and the Temple was in the 143rd year of the Seleucid era, this second one was therefore in the 145th year (of the same era), or 168 BC (verse 54: “on the 15th day of Chislev”). This was exactly the year when Antiochus’s successes in Egypt were unexpectedly halted by the authoritative Roman veto, and he was compelled to leave the borders of Egypt. It was then that he, embittered by so vexing a failure and at the same time exacting vengeance for an insult (the assistance given by the Jews in Jason’s attempt to displace Menelaus, which was taken as brazen rebellion against the royal person, see 2 Macc 5:5 and following), fell upon Jerusalem, where he could act as master as much as he pleased without meeting resistance. On the other hand, he also pursued here the positive aim of pushing forward his intentions more decisively — to paganize Jewry, which had understandably gloated over the shame of the king-robber and temple-plunderer as the beginning of God’s punishment upon him, and which had long been in the king’s view as the chief obstacle to creating a unified Hellenistic force capable of withstanding such a power as Rome. — “The king sent a chief tax collector...” — άρχών της φορολογίας — in 2 Macc 5:24 he is named by name — Apollonius. — “With a large crowd...” — έν οχλώ βαρεί — according to 2 Macc. in the passage cited — with 22,000 men. — “He struck it with a great blow...” — a Hebraism, an intensified expression — similar to “you shall surely die.”

1 Maccabees 1:30–32. he spoke deceitful words of peace to them, and they trusted him; but he suddenly fell upon the city and struck it with a great blow, and destroyed many people of Israel; he took plunder from the city, burned it with fire, tore down its houses and its walls on every side; and they led away captive the women and children, and seized the cattle. According to 2 Macc 5:25 and following, this was deliberately timed to fall on the Sabbath, when the Jews were observing strict rest. The immediate pretext for the attack is unknown; the city probably refused to admit so large a Syrian force.

1 Maccabees 1:33. They surrounded the city of David with a great and strong wall and strong towers, and it became a fortress for them. “They surrounded the city of David...” — this is not the same as Jerusalem, but only the fortified southwestern part of it — on the hill of Zion (2 Sam 5:7; cf. 1 Kgs 8:1). This distinction is made in the book itself several times, see 1 Macc 6:26, cf. also 1 Macc 2:31 and many others. — As for the name “Mount Zion,” it must be kept in mind that the author of the book often applies this name not to the Zion fortress where the “city of David” stood, but to the “Temple Mount,” which was also fortified, in contrast to the Syrian citadel (1 Macc 4:60; even more clearly — 1 Macc 4:37 and following, 1 Macc 5:54). The basis for this was provided by the poetic and prophetic use of the name Zion, by which the Temple Mount was also designated as the dwelling of the Lord (Ps 2:6; Ps 73:2; Isa 8:18) and all Jerusalem, as the city in which the Lord, the God of Israel, reigns (Ps 47:2-3; Isa 16:1; Jer 8:19 and others). — The appropriation of the name Zion to the Temple Mount was further encouraged by the occupation of Zion by the pagan citadel, which made it difficult to associate with the concept of Zion the idea of the Lord’s dwelling.

1 Maccabees 1:34. They stationed there a sinful people, lawless men, and they strengthened themselves in it; “A sinful people...” — έθνος “ αμαρτωλόν — the Jewish designation for pagans (1 Macc 2:48; 1 Macc 3:15; cf. Tob 13:6; Gal 2:15); by contrast: holy, righteous people δικαίων or δίκαιον έθνος — the designation for Jews (Esth 1:7 addition).

1 Maccabees 1:35. they provided themselves with weapons and provisions, and storing the plunder of Jerusalem there, they became a great snare. “And they became a great snare...” — i.e., very dangerous and threatening to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, since by holding this hill they could at any time dominate the entire city.

1 Maccabees 1:36. And this was a constant ambush against the sanctuary and an evil adversary for Israel. “And this (i.e., the fortification of the city of David with the Syrian garrison entrenched in it) was a constant ambush against the sanctuary...” since from the hill it was very easy to hinder the restoration of the sanctuary (1 Macc 6:18), which is why Judas, on undertaking this restoration and cleansing of the sanctuary, was obliged to detach special “men to fight against those in the citadel, until he had cleansed the sanctuary” (1 Macc 4:41). — “And this... was an evil adversary for Israel...” — εις διάβλον πονηρόν — a translation of the Hebrew word. The clarification of this figurative expression is provided by the following verse 37: the pagans desecrated and caused the Jewish sanctuary to cease functioning — not only by their presence on this site, but also by their godless and bloodthirsty deeds (cf. 2 Macc 6:4 and following), deliberately performed in order the more to humiliate and defile the Jewish holy place.

1 Maccabees 1:37–40. They shed innocent blood around the sanctuary and defiled the sanctuary. The inhabitants of Jerusalem fled because of them, and it became a dwelling of strangers and became strange to its own offspring, and its children forsook it. Its sanctuary was desolate like a wilderness, its feasts were turned into mourning, its Sabbaths into reproach, its honor into contempt. As great as its glory had been, so great was its dishonor, and its exaltation was turned into grief. Using the expressions of the Old Testament (prophecy), the author describes the consequences of the settlement and predatory rule of the pagans on the Holy Mount (cf. Amos 8:10; Tob 2:6); see more fully 1 Macc 4:38. — “As great as its glory had been, so great was its dishonor...” — i.e., the more brilliant its former glory had been, the more dishonoring appeared the shame that had now come, and “its exaltation (i.e., its grandeur, dignity) was turned into grief.”

1 Maccabees 1:41–42. King Antiochus wrote to his entire kingdom that all should be one people and that each should abandon his own law. And all the nations agreed according to the word of the king. “Antiochus wrote (i.e., issued an edict) to his entire kingdom that all should be one people and that each should abandon his own law...” — i.e., should give up his national particularities. The edict was clearly aimed against the Jews. This was not a mere infatuation with the unrealizable dream of universal equalization and fusion of peoples into one ideal people, for which Judaism and paganism alike would be asked to make equal concessions. For the latter such concessions involved nothing particularly significant, given its cosmopolitan indifference and disregard toward any gods and customs, its own or foreign. But for the Jews, with their exclusive religious worldview, this was the complete destruction of their faith and convictions and of the very possibility of living and existing. After the Lord they could in no case place any other god, and alongside His law, which permeated not only their entire spiritual-religious but also their civil life, they dared follow no pagan laws or customs. For Antiochus, who knew all this — this obstacle did not, however, seem entirely insurmountable. — “His entire kingdom,” apart from the Jews, was already what he dreamed of; the one remaining opponent of these dreams seemed too isolated and too weak in its resistance; and if this resistance were to cost the Jews dearly, all the better it seemed to Antiochus, who appeared not only as the victim of a lamentable obsession but also as a malicious avenger of old scores with Jewry and a hater of the Jews. Finally, what must also have given Antiochus’s hopes of success much encouragement was the fact that among the Jews themselves a movement toward Hellenism had already arisen, which had produced such characteristic instances of apostasy even before the edict, and which after the edict took on an even fairly serious character. The edict was issued throughout the kingdom — both to present the Hellenistic ideal in a more vivid light and with incontestable authority, and also in the calculation that it might reach the Jews throughout all the regions of the kingdom, which they had by then already sufficiently seeded with their diaspora.

1 Maccabees 1:43. And many from Israel adopted his idolatry and sacrificed to idols and profaned the Sabbath. 1 Maccabees 1:44. The king sent letters by messengers to Jerusalem and to the cities of Judah, ordering them to follow customs alien to this land, 1 Macc 1:44-51: The contents of the edict are set out in greater detail.

1 Maccabees 1:45–46. and that burnt offerings, sacrifices, and drink offerings at the sanctuary should not be permitted, that they should profane Sabbaths and feasts and defile the sanctuary and the holy ones, “Defile the sanctuary and the holy ones...” — i.e., the Temple and its ministers — the priests and Levites (Sir 45:29). The ancient Latin translation, however, also has here a variant reading: sancta et sanctum populum Israel, from which other commentators understand by “the holy ones” simply the faithful Israelites in general (αγιοι according to Dan 7:18; Dan 8:24); this interpretation, however, seems less fitting in connection with what precedes and follows.

1 Maccabees 1:47–52. and to build altars, sacred precincts, and shrines for idols, and to sacrifice swine and unclean animals, and to leave their sons uncircumcised, and to make their souls abominable with every kind of impurity and profanation, so that they would forget the law and change all the ordinances. And whoever does not do according to the word of the king shall be put to death. In accordance with this, he wrote to his entire kingdom and appointed overseers over all the people, and commanded the cities of Judah to offer sacrifice in each city. And many from the people gathered to them — all who had abandoned the law — and did evil in the land; “They gathered to them...” — i.e., to the Syrians, the pagans — they entered into fellowship with them.

1 Maccabees 1:53–54. and they drove Israel to hide in every refuge they had. On the fifteenth day of Chislev, in the one hundred and forty-fifth year, they set up the abomination of desolation upon the altar, and in the surrounding cities of Judah they built altars, “On the 15th day of Chislev, the 145th year” — i.e., of the Seleucid era — in December 168 BC. — “They set up the abomination of desolation upon the altar...” (Dan 11:31) — i.e., a pagan altar, which made it entirely impossible to offer lawful sacrifices to the true God.

1 Maccabees 1:55. and they burned incense before the doors of houses and in the streets, “They burned incense before the doors of houses and in the streets...” — such incense (and offerings in general) was burned in honor of the gods regarded as guardians of houses and streets, such as among the Romans Janus, among the Greeks Hermes, Apollo, Dionysus, and partly Artemis.

1 Maccabees 1:56. and the books of the law, whenever they found them, they tore and burned with fire; “Books of the law...” — τά βιβλία τού νόμου — properly the books of Moses, the Pentateuch, although in the broad sense this can also denote the books of the Old Testament in general.

1 Maccabees 1:57. and if anyone was found possessing a book of the covenant, or if anyone adhered to the law, he was put to death by the king’s command. “The book of the covenant” — βιβλίον διαθήιης — containing the Ten Commandments of God with the exposition of the basic laws of Israel given at Sinai (Exod 20-23, cf. Exod 24:7). For a more thorough defeat and destruction of Jewry, the entire sacred literature of the Hebrews had to be subjected to persecution.

1 Maccabees 1:58. With such violence they treated the Israelites who were brought each month into the cities. “With such violence they treated the Israelites who were brought each month into the cities.” Some have understood here the monthly coming of the Jews into the cities to celebrate the new moon, which the king’s overseers exploited to seize and oppress these zealots of the law of Moses. Other commentators give the participle “brought” a passive sense and understand not their voluntary coming but their involuntary summoning, compelled by being called to account in the localities for their refusal to carry out the king’s will; in other words this should be expressed as follows: “with such violence they treated the Israelites arrested and brought each month (to imprisonment and punishment) into the cities (from the surrounding areas).”

1 Maccabees 1:59. And on the twenty-fifth day of the month, offering sacrifice on the altar that was above the altar, “On the twenty-fifth day of the month...” the offering of pagan sacrifices on the site of the Lord’s altar began. This date must be distinguished from the “15th day” of the same month (Chislev), when they only “set up the abomination of desolation upon the altar,” i.e., the pagan altar, but the actual offering of sacrifices began on the 25th (1 Macc 4:52; 2 Macc 10:5).

1 Maccabees 1:60. they put to death, by the command given, the women who had circumcised their children, “They put to death the women who had circumcised their children...” — here there is no need to understand necessarily the actual circumcision of their children by the mothers themselves, as in, for example, the exceptional case of Exod 4:25; — the text speaks simply of women who had allowed their children to be circumcised; the actual performers of the circumcision, who suffered the same sad fate, are mentioned separately further on (1 Macc 1:61).

1 Maccabees 1:61. and they hanged the infants by their necks, plundered their houses, and killed those who had circumcised them. As an example of the — not isolated — inhuman treatment of mothers and their children on account of circumcision, 2 Macc 6:10 cites the case of two women being killed together with their infants who had been hung at the mothers’ breasts: in that position the unfortunate women were cast down from a high city wall.

1 Maccabees 1:62. Yet many in Israel stood firm and resolved not to eat unclean food, “Resolved...” — όχυρούσθαι έν έαυτοις — strengthened themselves within themselves, firmly resolved.

1 Maccabees 1:63. and chose rather to die than to be defiled by food and to violate the holy covenant, — and they died. “Chose rather to die... and they died.” Here reference is probably made also to the courageous martyrdom of the seven brothers “the Maccabees” with their mother Solomonia and their teacher Eleazar, who are commemorated by the Christian Church on August 1 (2 Macc 6:18 and following; 2 Macc 7).

1 Maccabees 1:64. And there was very great wrath upon Israel. * * * The Books of Maccabees were translated from the Greek, because there is no Hebrew text of them. The genealogy of the Seleucids is as follows: Seleucus I Nicator, died 261 BC. Antiochus I Soter, died 261 BC. Antiochus II Theos, died 246 BC. Seleucus II Callinicus, died 226 BC. — Seleucus III Ceraunus, died 223 BC; Antiochus III the Great, died 187 BC. — — From Antiochus the Great: Seleucus IV Philopator, died 175 BC; Antiochus IV Epiphanes, died 164 BC; Demetrius I Soter, died 150 BC; Antiochus V Eupator, died 162 BC. Alexander Balas; Antiochus VI. From Demetrius I Soter: Demetrius II Nicator, died 125–124 BC. Antiochus VII Sidetes, died 128 BC, and so on.